Sep 222023

Despite this endorsement of a dem featuring a fake-two-star GOP elephant to deceive voters, the OCGOP is undaunted in their efforts..

Why would we expect anything different from the OCGOP with regard to Janet Nguyen – to whom the leadership seems to have an irrational loyalty to?

This seems to be a 2023-2024 GOP Theme. Change the rules to benefit one person. Anyone who does organizational leadership or consulting will tell you that forming rules or organizing around one person is a recipe for disaster. (see also Martha Stewart or Bill Cosby)

As you know, scrutiny of her party-destroying ways caused Janet Nguyen to withdraw her request for endorsement from the OCGOP.

Tim Whitacre appears to be the person leading the charge to change the OCGOP By-Laws to benefit Janet Nguyen. This is a far cry from when he lambasted her on camera. The following is a new by-law proposal that Whitacre is running for approval:

  • Any endorsed Republican candidate who believes an endorser of their non-Republican opponent has violated the bylaws in their endorsement must submit a formal written complaint to the Chairman or staff requesting the endorsement be revoked. In a timely manner, staff will verify the voter registration status of the non-Republican in question. Once verified, staff shall inform the endorser of their potential violation in writing, the endorser shall then have no more than 3 business days from transmission to acknowledge receipt of the OCGOP email by replying to it, as well as copying the Chairman or staff on an email sent to the non-Republican candidate he/she previously endorsed, publicly rescinding their endorsement of said candidate and instructing them to promptly remove any written proof of the previous endorsement on websites, campaign literature, etc. A candidate who fails to act in accordance with this paragraph shall not be considered eligible for endorsement by the Central Committee for a period of 4 years. If a candidate is the sole Republican or if there are not more Republican candidates than seats available, this rule shall not be applicable.
A candidate who has violated this rule will be eligible to be considered for endorsement if the following occur:
a. The candidate submits a written letter of explanation to the Executive Committee and the Central Committee, and;
b. 2/3rds of the Executive Committee approves the request, and;
c. 2/3rds of the Central Committee approves the request.
Here is the bottom line if this by-law is adopted:
The same 2/3 that could endorse a candidate would also be able to allow the endorsee to freely endorse democrats and non-republicans against the OCGOP endorsements. (see also Janet Nguyen, Tom Tait, etc.)
The current OCGOP Central Committee is nearly 2/3 in favor of the very liberal (for a Republican) Janet Nguyen who consistently supports non-Republicans for office. But, there’s more:
This rule change basically means if no one says anything about the bad endorsement during the actual campaign that the would-be endorsee is in the clear, and worse, it puts a 4-year statute of limitations on the exclusion.
Let’s be intellectually honest – why not propose eliminating the endorse democrats rule altogether?
It is one thing to change convention rules to benefit one Republican Candidate over others. It is still another to defy the integrity of the Republican Party by creating an all-too-transparent escape hatch to absolve the behavior of one candidate who has been on a personal rampage for years against endorsed Republican candidates. What a message this sends to the Republican electorate.
Previously, I had given Fred Whitaker (no relation to Tim Whitacre) credit for enforcing the by-laws of the OCGOP and thusly leading to the withdrawal of Nguyen. I then received this in my inbox:

Senator Janet Nguyen voluntarily asked to withdraw her application for endorsement with the opportunity to come back later.   I asked Van Tran whether he wished to do the same or go forward.  He decided to go forward.   Additionally, he has sent repeated emails to this Committee and other stating that Sen. Nguyen was forced to withdraw for violating our bylaws.  I have made no ruling on the bylaws. His emails are ungracious at best, disingenuous at worst.   Senator Nguyen is a powerful candidate for that position and a critical part of our victory team not only in her district, but Diane Dixon’s district and Huntington Beach last cycle.   I don’t believe that Van is the best candidate for the OCGOP in that seat, so if he decides to continue with his application on Monday night, I ask the Committee to vote “No” on his application, as I will.

Your intrepid blogger has asked for any corroborating evidence that Van Tran misspoke. Janet Nguyen WAS forced to withdraw her request for an endorsement because of her misdeeds and the Whitacre-Whitaker effort to change the rules PROVES Nguyen got caught!

I do also take note that one of the few times Whitaker chooses to assert himself is on behalf of someone who makes a mockery of the OCGOP endorsement and has been on a party-destroying rampage. This gives your intrepid blogger whiplash.

Stay Informed!

Sign up to receive RightOnDaily updates sent to your inbox.

  One Response to “Janet Nguyen Update: If at First You Don’t Succeed, CHANGE THE RULES!”

  1. So, help me to understand this better. I see on a OCGOP website, people who got elected, with I presume, is with their help:
    1) Senator Janet Nguyen (SD36)
    2) Assemblymember Kate Sanchez(AD71)

    I seem to recall both of these ‘women’ being on this very blog as being anything BUT a republican. Yet, there they are. In office. Elected. Supported. Backed by the so called, ‘ in the know ‘ people. Now, someone named Tim Whitacre, Sgt at arms of the OCGOP, is proposing a rule change? To do what? Allow a sellout, Repub p arty destroyer to get….an endorsement? Please can someone who supposedly has more knowledge, more street credentials than myself, explain this travesty? Cause I’d sure as hell like to know how this happens.

    Who’s getting paid for this? Who is getting kickbacks for this? Surely, it isn’t because of some message…it HAS to be over funding. Right? How are these folks getting IN, if so many know-it-alls, know what’s going on? Maybe they don’t? Maybe, they’re not as knowledgeable as people make them out to be? (agreed, they’ve been in this game longer, and people change once in office, but the degree of changes as reported here, seems to show they’ve felt this way LONG before getting into office).

    I’d like to be able to speak with our elected reps in our State Capital, if they ever or even wish to avail themselves that is. I’m not sure however, how I would be in front of the two women named above. Would it be political suicide to shun a sell-out? Do we hold our noses, when we KNOW we have a Judas in our midst? That’s a hard one. But hey, I’ve got time. Hatch Act…..(ugh) has put me on the PAUSE moment for now. That’s death for anyone else who is vying for office. I’ll endure, because I have no choice. Eight months and counting.

    Speaking of: Did you all hear the report that is saying, by 2030 we’ll be LOSING another 4 Congressional seats in California, at the current pace of citizen loss?? I have. Big challenge, for the Gov candidate to keep that from happening during the 2026-2030 term of office.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>